Laughing Man

;---]]

fab... cool... you know, real GOOD!

Excellent choice as the first image of PoW's return; I've always liked Steve's work.

I don't have anything intelligent to say, but the unexpected framing just perfectly encapsulates the spirit of the laughing man.

Very pleased that the PoW is back. This is an excellent choice and I like the b/w tones.

Nice to see POTW back!
I like this picture. The man, and his expression, is such a dominant force in the triangular composition there is no question as to what this picture is about. That simple directness is amplified by the black and white rendering with the man's head cleanly defined by it's juxtaposition to the sky.
I'd like a bit less car clutter but on the street you take life as it comes. And what an interesting slice of life this is. Well done, Steve.

Steve:
This image has several strong elements - the tonal range, excellent composition and perspective, a dramatic sky and, best of all, an exuberant subject. Thanks to the Elves for restarting POTW with a bang.

My best,

michael

Glenn, Cara, Jin, and the elves ,thanks all of you for the hard work , and bringing back the POW! with a very nice start.

Very nice timing Steve,and the B/W choice fits the subject. I think as Luis that a bit shallower BG was even enhancing the whole.( the cars are adding IMO the this ambiguity) ..

My Compliments , Steve.

(Sorry ,could no alighn the writing to normal it did not work.)

Steve,

I respond to the boldness and weight of the man, emphasized by the perspective and darkened exposure against the sky. His expression is one that you've kind of forced me to contend with and I can really feel its influence. It's like I'm under its thumb. The car behind him on the road, almost a part of him, and the cars in the lot in the background are nicely kept in focus and become, therefore, concretized and continue the energy I find in the man. Cluttered? Perhaps, but in a good way expressively, and presenting the energy of the environs as a nice foil for the man. There's a sense of acceptance in your shooting, the allowance of randomness and the energy that flows with that, a very natural sense of composition without the self consciousness that might come with a more pre-determinedly neat or sparse view. Still, there's no mistaking what dominates this scene.

What strikes me here is the relationship between content and photographic expression, particularly in the exposure and the handling of highlights. A friend and I were discussing yesterday that the approach to this photo works because it seems integrated with the content.

An aside about DOF. A narrower DOF here, IMO, especially in an attempt to cover up what might have been perceived as clutter, probably would have failed. Blurred backgrounds can be very effective, but I think here it might have come off as a tacit admission that you didn't get the composition or background you wanted and you were trying to make it disappear. I don't get that sort of sensibility from this photo, which seems to put it all out, even want it all there, and which seems to embrace the fullness and connectivity of what the scene had to offer. There are tensions, and variously weighted forms are in competition . . . and it's a guy on a busy road.

An excellent choice to celebrate the return of the Picture of the Week.

Passing through Steve's portofolio, I've checked this image several times, and never really found the words/ideas to come to some cohesive critique. When I look again now, still the same. It's not because the photo is ambiguous - it is, and it's an aspect I like. To me, the busy road contradicts a bit with the smile. I like this, it's slightly ambiguous but it elevates the total (and hence agree with what Fred wrote on DoF: it's good as it is - less DoF would have made it a normal portrait, now it's an "environmental portrait" instead, the surrounding matters).
It's also not that this photo wouldn't engage - totally the opposite. I find it a very engaging image, it makes me feel very much part of the scene. It's not holding back in any way, no seeming distance at all, and it also does not seem posed. Like the photo was taken as two friends walk down a busy road. As a viewer, we're made one of those two.
I seriously only can find things to like about this image. And yet, there is something that refrained me from writing a critique, or from being cohesive here. Maybe it's this little itch this photo leaves in my mind: where are we walking? Where does this lead to?

I like the photograph, itself, but if it weren't for the title, I wouldn't know if he is laughing or crying out in terror of some disaster. I do love the strong b&w.

Also, although I'm pleased the POTW has returned, why not put it back the way it was before and have it visible as we're leaving a critique? It's easier than switching back and forth between tabs.

I would like to add that when we critique a photo ,the photo rest before our eyes so when we are writing we can look again for small details that we may have missed seeing in the begining( I think Jim though the same).

About the title:

I'm okay with images either titled or not, and even ones with wordy descriptions are fine if it can help me appreciate the picture; I'd rather understand the motivation or story behind the image than to create my own interpretation.

Along those lines, I never knew why Einstein stuck out his tongue in that iconic photo and an explanation would have helped me appreciate it even more whether through its title or a description.

In this case, "Laughing Man" is just enough to create a leading context for viewers to further interpret if they wish, or in my case, I simply saw a happy guy in a parking lot perfectly framed that made me smile.

I felt the same way, Wouter. It's the type of picture, to me, that should be considered ordinary yet I can't really understand why it's striking a chord.

It took some time, but here are a few things I can now identify: The forward lean of the man implies motion and also breaks up the vertical in an almost square crop. The hefty build of the man is also perfectly weighted as a percentage of the picture he occupies. Finally, the camera angle that almost looks like it might have been a hip shot, and boy did it work out well. And of course, that happy laugh.

I don't know that a better picture can be had even if we can freeze that scene and have another chance at it.

I like the diagonal placement on the frame vs,his face on the sky.

About titles, I like them, but I prefer those that leave something for the viewer imagination....

Michael, I like your description from 1:25am as well as your take on the title. I think the title is simply honest from the point of view of the photographer: this is what I saw. Much as the photo is. In a way, the title is just there. It grounds it. It doesn't lead me anywhere. It just lets me know. Anyway, much of the expression is in the shooting . . . framing, exposure, contrast, perspective, relationships. To me, it's about him as a photographed man in place. My interpretation of the expression seems less important here than the boldness and blatancy of it. "Laughing man" simply gets interpretation out of the way quickly and lets the visual/photographic take over. This photo seems more about photo than about particular man.

On a second look, I have to agree. The diagonal thrust of the subject seems to add energy that resonates well with his dynamic expression. The low camera angle not only helps isolate but lends a sense of monumentality and power to the figure.

I can practically hear his bellowing laugh... & sense his quick stride...
The POV & the way the man is featured in the frame (en profil & in movement) really seem to enhance that effect.
The dark processing is very expressively done indeed, and somehow seems to add to a sense of anonymity of the man -- it is more about his expression and display of character rather than about him.
A particular moment in the street, coming across as more 'felt' than 'observed'...
"Laughing Man" works well for me as title, since it seems just so perfectly understated.
It is a very good photo and one that really triggers the senses (mine for sure), although it isn't among my personal favorites of Steve's portfolio. (There are just so many great pictures to enjoy there:-)
I'm glad Steve is featured here this week, as it may incite more people to visit and discover Steve's very fine and original work.

So good to have the POTW back.

I didn't need the title to know that the man was laughing -- I can see it in his eyes. Had it been some other emotion, especially a negative emotion, his eyes would have been wide open.

I think a somewhat more shallow DOF would have worked well here. I wouldn't interpret a shallow DOF as an attempt to obscure what might be perceived as clutter, but rather as an increased visual emphasis on the man while still allowing the background to be seen for what it is -- a collection of cars and trees.

I wonder what is causing his laughter / delight and his moving forward.....it's been left to the imagination, which enhances my interest in the photograph -- it stays in my mind.

Stephen, good points. Most people have found the man to be boldly present here. If you were making the photo, why would you want increased visual emphasis on him?

The photos has losts of impact and energy - important in any winning photo

Sue

Not sure what the protocol is here. Should I comment, should I not comment? I obviously opted for the latter. ;-)

First, thanks to the elves. This was an honor and a surprise. I believe the verbiage that used to accompany the POW was something to the effect that the photo was selected to create discussion, not necessarily because it was considered good. I am conscious of that.

Second, thanks to all who have commented. I do appreciate it.

About the photo: It was taken with a Pentax K5, Pentax SMC-DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited lens, f8 at 1/100, ISO 800. (I usually prefer my Pentax 35mm for street photography but I happened to be using the 21mm on this particular evening). Michael Chang is right, this was a hip shot (a technique I will sometimes use when I am really close to people). I was walking through a parking lot at dusk and noticed this very jovial man talking to people I assume were family members or friends. I stepped over toward him, got as close as I could, and took the photograph. Camera was on autofocus. When I use the 21mm I try to get really close to subjects and the autofocus does the trick in such close proximity. I have no idea who he was or what he was laughing about, but he was one of those people whose personality just seems to effortlessly project itself. He was a total stranger, but I just felt myself smiling in his presence without even knowing what he was laughing about. As a general rule, my work tends to have a darker cast to it (in terms of mood or atmosphere) than this particular image. 90% of the time I use titles that are as objective and non-committal as possible. I initially entitled this "Man in parking lot", but his laughter and demeanor was just such a large part of the photo for me that I went with "Laughing Man"

As much as I appreciate those who have said that the dof is fine as it is, I do tend to agree that a shallower dof, and no car protruding from the man's chest, would have been better. But, as Louis said, on the street you sometimes have to take what you can get. Thanks again, and that's enough out of me.

Breaks a lot of rules, and very successfully, I might add. Old time photographers will love it.

Steve, part of the reasons we wanted the POW back, was the possibility to have a dialogue with the photographer, ask questions, his reaction to what he thinks are right or not in comments, the story behind the photo, equipment use.

In short a learning mode! thanks for your detailed answer.

In orde to have the POW as a learning tool , it is good to have chosen photographers work that are active at PN and can enter in the middle of the process.
( if you look at the previous works of POW, Fred G. was a good example)
Glad to have your work chosen to start with , and your reaction.

I agree with Pnina that it's great to hear Steve's take. It helps us get inside and understand him. I also try to keep in mind that a viewer's interpretation or like of a photo or element can be different from the photographer's. There can be that disconnect between what a photographer sees and thinks and what his viewers see and think.

Steve can be definitive about his own intent (though sometimes we're less sure of our own intent than we might think). If we were guessing whether he was trying to portray joyfulness, and we didn't have the title, he could tell us. That wouldn't, however, mean the man looked joyful to us, only that that was Steve's intent. If I don't think he looks happy (which I do in this case) and Steve thinks he does, that doesn't change my own response to the photo.

My reaction here to what Steve and Louis said about street work and taking what you get is twofold. I understand it and think it's good insight. At the same time, that factor affects how I see this photo and why I like the car coming out of the stomach and the fuller depth of field. These elements telegraph what is so real about street shooting. Why shy away from them? They seem to make this, to me, a rather strong standout in Steve's portfolio. I'm not sure, but I sense Steve may feel differently given what he said about the Elves not necessarily picking the best photo in one's portfolio. This photo, for me, IS the street. For me, the in-your-face-ness of the car in the position it's in echoes the strength and spontaneity of the expression on the man. It grabs me, in part, because of the car. Were it me, at this point, the boldness, unexpectedness, and disquietude of the car where it is would be something to work with and work toward. Work toward BECAUSE I feel the street and its randomness and inconvenience, not necessarily just accept it because I have to take what I can get.

I like this picture better in a small format as it is in the newsletter.
I am glad to see that the photo of the week is back.